QE4Ever!

[sparky]

The link in the OP fundamentally misunderstands what is happening in the market.

Then perhaps you can 'splain it Toro

~S~

 

[sparky]

The Fed launched QE nine years ago — these four charts show its impact

“This is a big experiment,” Logan said. “It’s something that’s never been done before.”

should we be feeling like a >>>

~S~

 

[pknopp]

Nope. I just didn't expect to see him bend over for wall street.

Did I find others who were as dissapointed? Yes, it's why Trump won. If President Obama had been the person Candidate Obama said he would be, there would be no President Trump today.

Now you are plainly starting to bore me. Jumping from the much maligned QE to the equal economies that weren't, arriving at the savior who could have fixed "things" but didn't, we now get President Obama to "bend over for wall street" - but you couldn't explain what that means if your life depended on it. The reason for that is, your knowledge is as shallow as a piss puddle, and your desire to condemn is not matched by a desire to learn exactly for what he deserves condemnation.

If you have anything specific, best with a link, to bring forward, go ahead. Otherwise, shove it.

So you call me out and ask me to be specific with links. I do so and you then ignore it with no reply?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Take a stand bud...once and for all be clear with where you stand, stop the toe the line "HATE" is a scary word pussy shit.
You support the wetback invasion, you think it's good for Americans and we should continue to pretend it's not happening?
OR
You HATE the wetbacks invasion, you think its bad for Americans and we need to unwind the bullshit now?

Which is it, don't be scared.

It is neither. I am against illegal immigration and those that support it. I have given a plan multiple times that would stop it. There is no hate involved, it is logical to be against illegal immigration as it hurts all involved except the scant few that take advantage of the situation and make a profit.

Why does there need to be hate? Hate is a silly emotion, hate takes time and effort and gives nothing in exchange.

Think about it...your hate drove you to post from Belize...fuck I was gone to Ohio with family for two days and did not even think about posting from there.

Haha...word games are fun. You have chosen "HATE" as your word to play semantics with today...cool.
Meanwhile, in the real world hatred remains a very useful emotion...It keeps people motivated and ambitious. I encourage HATE of all things / people that should be hated.

Hate is a terrible thing....it drives you to post on a forum while vacationing in Belize. That alone should tell anyone that hate is not good.

 

[Toro]

The link in the OP fundamentally misunderstands what is happening in the market.

Then perhaps you can 'splain it Toro

~S~

Quantitative easing is a program that targets interest rates to support a level of GDP growth.

The Fed's repo mechanics are designed to maintain liquidity in the funding markets. Support of the repo markets is, in effect, the same as open market operations that support the Fed Funds rate.

The two are totally different.

 

[Olde Europe]

Yet my spidey sense tells me i'm being told one thing, while the elites running the show are doing another...

Your "spidey sense" may be quite accurate, Sparky. However, listening to them, and concluding they are lying, doesn't make running into the opposite direction a sane option. Let's look back at the last crash, as there was one thing to learn: Either these folks have no clue about the cliff ahead, or they know and keep their mouth shut - for if they told what's going to happen, they would bring it about. That's what herd mentality, and everyone running for the exits in a collective panic, tell us. So, us lesser financial savants are left holding the bag each and every time, and that will remain so until the financial industry is reduced to a few percent of its current size, or the end of times, whichever comes first.

 

[Seawytch]

Eventually, all those trillions of dollars the Fed has pumped into the system will start to move around, pick up velocity.

THEN we will see inflation.

I explained it all in my Federal Reserve Bond Bubble Doomsday Machine topic.

How else do you get an innocent price and tax increase?

Trillion dollar deficits are easier to pay off with a weak dollar.

Here's the brilliant plan our 'stable genius' came up with: Donald Trump: U.S. will never default 'because you print the money'

^^^
More fake news from CNN.

If you go to the link, there's a video of Donald saying it, butthead.

The Trump worshipers actually think the videos are fake.

Eventually Trump himself will believe he didn't say what he is on tape saying...

Trump Once Said the ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape Was Real. Now He’s Not Sure.

 

[sparky]

Ok, i get it's deep, correct me if i'm wrong again...i'm a simple man...

The Fed is taking US treasury bonds, securities

That would be the US dept of the Treasury

Now you can tell me it's 'all on paper', but doesn't the tax payer ultimately own the US Treasury?

Further , the Fed is owned by bankers , who are essentially taking something of value from the US tax payer . because yet again they're 'too big to fail'....which means they';re holding the economy hostage

Hey, i'm not going to scream 'end the fed' , or hide under my bed about this, but how TF can anyone claim it's a 'great economy' with this going down?

This is how wars start...all it takes is a little of that 'yellow journalism' ....

~S~

 

[Olde Europe]

So you call me out and ask me to be specific with links. I do so and you then ignore it with no reply?

Yeah... you had a book author musing about, had Obama thrown some Wall Street tycoons in jail, Trump wouldn't have happened. And a Counterpunch piece with a snippet out of another book (misrepresenting the book's much more nuanced discussion) involving pitch forks, also insinuating that Obama had made the decision to protect Wall Street against prosecution. Neither article had any specific evidence for that claim. Neither article even went so far as to address the question of whether or not Obama had any power over the prosecutions. Because, in reality, presidents involving themselves in prosecutions is frowned upon, and for good reason.

So, I chose to dismiss that nonsense, quietly. I thought, you would be smart to follow my example.

 

[pknopp]

So you call me out and ask me to be specific with links. I do so and you then ignore it with no reply?

Yeah... you had a book author musing about, had Obama thrown some Wall Street tycoons in jail, Trump wouldn't have happened. And a Counterpunch piece with a snippet out of another book (misrepresenting the book's much more nuanced discussion) involving pitch forks, also insinuating that Obama had made the decision to protect Wall Street against prosecution. Neither article had any specific evidence for that claim.

How about the fact that NO ONE was charged with anything?

Neither article even went so far as to address the question of whether or not Obama had any power over the prosecutions. Because, in reality, presidents involving themselves in prosecutions is frowned upon, and for good reason.

So he lied or was ignorant when he promised his administration would do so?

So, I chose to dismiss that nonsense, quietly. I thought, you would be smart to follow my example.

Nope. Just starting.

#2. His promise to ban lobbyists from the White House.

Obama's lobbyist rule: Promise Broken

 

[Toro]

Ok, i get it's deep, correct me if i'm wrong again...i'm a simple man...

The Fed is taking US treasury bonds, securities

That would be the US dept of the Treasury

Yes. They buy Treasury securities and supply cash into the economy. They've been doing that for 106 years.

Now you can tell me it's 'all on paper', but doesn't the tax payer ultimately own the US Treasury?

Further , the Fed is owned by bankers , who are essentially taking something of value from the US tax payer . because yet again they're 'too big to fail'....which means they';re holding the economy hostage

The Fed is not like a typical bank. It is a creature of the government. It is more like a co-operative than a private corporation since every bank in the system has the same number of votes regardless of the number of shares a bank owns. Member banks receive a 6% dividend on the shares they own, but 98% of the profits of the Fed are returned to the US Treasury.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Poor, weak Obama. 59 Senators and 257 in the House, still couldn't get anything done.

Except for the things he did get done, that you and others have been crying about for ten years. That's a lot of crying over "nothing".

Except for the things he did get done,

Don't tell Lesh that he got anything done with 59 or fewer Senators.
He'll accuse you of not understanding.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ok, i get it's deep, correct me if i'm wrong again...i'm a simple man...

The Fed is taking US treasury bonds, securities

That would be the US dept of the Treasury

Yes. They buy Treasury securities and supply cash into the economy. They've been doing that for 106 years.

Now you can tell me it's 'all on paper', but doesn't the tax payer ultimately own the US Treasury?

Further , the Fed is owned by bankers , who are essentially taking something of value from the US tax payer . because yet again they're 'too big to fail'....which means they';re holding the economy hostage

The Fed is not like a typical bank. It is a creature of the government. It is more like a co-operative than a private corporation since every bank in the system has the same number of votes regardless of the number of shares a bank owns. Member banks receive a 6% dividend on the shares they own, but 98% of the profits of the Fed are returned to the US Treasury.

Member banks receive a 6% dividend on the shares they own,

Not any more, except for small banks. Now it's based on the 10-year yield.

The Federal Reserve Board on Wednesday issued a final rule that amends Regulation I to implement provisions of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. The final rule is the same as the interim final rule the Board issued in February. The FAST Act reduced the dividend rate applicable to Reserve Bank depository institution stockholders with total assets of more than $10 billion (large member banks) to the lesser of 6 percent or the most recent 10-year Treasury auction rate prior to the dividend payment. The dividend rate for other member banks remains at 6 percent. Reserve Banks typically pay dividends to member banks in June and December each year.

The final rule, which takes effect January 1, 2017, also adjusts the treatment of accrued dividends when a Reserve Bank issues or cancels capital stock owned by a large member bank.

Federal Reserve Board issues final rule regarding dividend payments on Reserve Bank capital stock

 

[Toro]

Ok, i get it's deep, correct me if i'm wrong again...i'm a simple man...

The Fed is taking US treasury bonds, securities

That would be the US dept of the Treasury

Yes. They buy Treasury securities and supply cash into the economy. They've been doing that for 106 years.

Now you can tell me it's 'all on paper', but doesn't the tax payer ultimately own the US Treasury?

Further , the Fed is owned by bankers , who are essentially taking something of value from the US tax payer . because yet again they're 'too big to fail'....which means they';re holding the economy hostage

The Fed is not like a typical bank. It is a creature of the government. It is more like a co-operative than a private corporation since every bank in the system has the same number of votes regardless of the number of shares a bank owns. Member banks receive a 6% dividend on the shares they own, but 98% of the profits of the Fed are returned to the US Treasury.

Member banks receive a 6% dividend on the shares they own,

Not any more, except for small banks. Now it's based on the 10-year yield.

The Federal Reserve Board on Wednesday issued a final rule that amends Regulation I to implement provisions of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. The final rule is the same as the interim final rule the Board issued in February. The FAST Act reduced the dividend rate applicable to Reserve Bank depository institution stockholders with total assets of more than $10 billion (large member banks) to the lesser of 6 percent or the most recent 10-year Treasury auction rate prior to the dividend payment. The dividend rate for other member banks remains at 6 percent. Reserve Banks typically pay dividends to member banks in June and December each year.

The final rule, which takes effect January 1, 2017, also adjusts the treatment of accrued dividends when a Reserve Bank issues or cancels capital stock owned by a large member bank.

Federal Reserve Board issues final rule regarding dividend payments on Reserve Bank capital stock

I did not see that. Thanks.

It makes perfect sense given the knee-scraping yields in the bond market.

 

[Olde Europe]

So you call me out and ask me to be specific with links. I do so and you then ignore it with no reply?

Yeah... you had a book author musing about, had Obama thrown some Wall Street tycoons in jail, Trump wouldn't have happened. And a Counterpunch piece with a snippet out of another book (misrepresenting the book's much more nuanced discussion) involving pitch forks, also insinuating that Obama had made the decision to protect Wall Street against prosecution. Neither article had any specific evidence for that claim.

How about the fact that NO ONE was charged with anything?

Neither article even went so far as to address the question of whether or not Obama had any power over the prosecutions. Because, in reality, presidents involving themselves in prosecutions is frowned upon, and for good reason.

So he lied or was ignorant when he promised his administration would do so?

He promised his administration would do what, exactly?

The administration extracted some $200bn in fines etc. I, too, thought some banksters should have taken advantage of federal housing, but that was not to be. Tough shit.

So, I chose to dismiss that nonsense, quietly. I thought, you would be smart to follow my example.

Nope. Just starting.

#2. His promise to ban lobbyists from the White House.

Obama's lobbyist rule: Promise Broken

Oh, for crying out loud! Yes, in light of the realities of the office, some pipe dreams just plop, and he hired some lobbyists, though way fewer than anyone else in living memory, and certainly fewer than the gang of grafters now infesting federal offices.

Say, pknopp, did your hoped-for savior turn out to be human, a politician, no less, and did he fail to live up to your standards of purity and sanctity? And, have you ever since been parading around your oh-so bitter disappointment?

Grow up and get over it already. No one will ever live up to your level of purity. That's still no reason to reach down the cloaca, pull out a Trump and make him president. Not in any reasonable universe anyway.

 

[pknopp]

So you call me out and ask me to be specific with links. I do so and you then ignore it with no reply?

Yeah... you had a book author musing about, had Obama thrown some Wall Street tycoons in jail, Trump wouldn't have happened. And a Counterpunch piece with a snippet out of another book (misrepresenting the book's much more nuanced discussion) involving pitch forks, also insinuating that Obama had made the decision to protect Wall Street against prosecution. Neither article had any specific evidence for that claim.

How about the fact that NO ONE was charged with anything?

Neither article even went so far as to address the question of whether or not Obama had any power over the prosecutions. Because, in reality, presidents involving themselves in prosecutions is frowned upon, and for good reason.

So he lied or was ignorant when he promised his administration would do so?

He promised his administration would do what, exactly?

His promises were in the links. I thought you read them?

administration extracted some $200bn in fines etc. I, too, thought some banksters should have taken advantage of federal housing, but that was not to be. Tough shit.

Oh, for crying out loud! Yes, in light of the realities of the office, some pipe dreams just plop, and he hired some lobbyists, though way fewer than anyone else in living memory, and certainly fewer than the gang of grafters now infesting federal offices.

Say, pknopp, did your hoped-for savior turn out to be human, a politician, no less, and did he fail to live up to your standards of purity and sanctity? And, have you ever since been parading around your oh-so bitter disappointment?

Grow up and get over it already. No one will ever live up to your level of purity. That's still no reason to reach down the cloaca, pull out a Trump and make him president. Not in any reasonable universe anyway.

#3. His broken promise to the Hispanics.

Obama Broke His Promise to Latinos (Maybe We Should Sit This Election Out)

 

[Lesh]

So nothing has ever gotten done unless one party had 60 votes?
Idiot Lesh has no idea how government works.

With Republicans?

They ARE the party of no and have been for decades

Are you pretending they didn't block everything they could?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So nothing has ever gotten done unless one party had 60 votes?
Idiot Lesh has no idea how government works.

With Republicans?

They ARE the party of no and have been for decades

Are you pretending they didn't block everything they could?

Poor weak Obama, 59 votes in the Senate and he still let Republicans block him.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Poor weak Obama, 59 votes in the Senate and he still let Republicans block him

* Then proceeds to whine about Obama pushing through the ACA

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Poor weak Obama, 59 votes in the Senate and he still let Republicans block him

* Then proceeds to whine about Obama pushing through the ACA

He do anything besides ACA?